Fort Worth weekly gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-06-17
THE SAN ANTONIO OUTRAGE.

| The Times has no hesitation in prOn0uncinl
| the action of the Council yesterday, refusing
| the prohibitionists the use of the plaza fol-
meetir gs, both unfair and impolitic. Such dis
| tlnCtions have not heretofore been made
Granting that the people who asked this priv
lege are extreme and fanatcal in their views
| and that what they propose to effect is against
| the property interests of this city, this is 8
| country where the largest liberty of speech Is
! guaranteed, and the right of the people to
| peaceably assemble in public meeting is jeal-
| ously guarded 1t would be time enough 10
| prohibit such meetings when they became dis
| orderly, or If they were held ostensibly for In
cendary purposes.
! The large majority of our people are anti
| Prohibitionists, and the Council was doubtless
! honest in attempting to carry out their wishes;
| but, all the same, the action was impolitiC and
| instead of helping along the anti prohibition
| cause and thus serving the interests OF san
| Antonio, VIII have an opposite effect, and Will
be used all over the state by the Prohbtionists.
We cannot afford to follow the proscriptive
| examples the Prohibitionists have, in some in
| stances, set us. If personal liberty is to be
maintained, 1t Will not be by such a course. II
won't do for anti-Prohibitionists to become
Prohibitionists in that way.-ISan Antonio
Times.
The whole affair is to be regretted, the action
of the City Council and the outrageous conduct
of irresponsible parties at the mass meeting,
who disgraced themselves and the ca Sc for
which they ostensi5ly, though certainly not
with authority, acted, and whose conduct we
fear will unjustly be charged upon the anti
Prohibitionists as a body, though they will GER
tainly everywhere repudiate such lawlessness.
-LAustin Statesman.
Without doubt the San Antonio out
rage was inspired by the intolerance of
the San Antonio authorities in refusing q
public plaza to the public; and the hood
lums who broke up the prohibition meet
ing felt themselves justified in preventing
by force what the municipal government
had sought to prevent by refusal, viz: the
right of the people to peacefully meet
and express publicly their opinions on
measure which the constitution of the
United States does not inhi5it the people
from adopting if the people will to do so.
This disgrace to San Antonio and
shame to Texas aud injury to the anti
prohibition cause was born of an intoler-
ant and lawless spirit, as manifested even
in the common council of the city; the
same spirit has been manifested else
where, and there are men identified with
the liquor traffic who do their cause IS
much injury in less violent manner than
that adopted by the brewers employe
at San Antonio, but in way fully
as significant OF the intolersnt
spirit entertained. The prompt and
energetic condemnation of this spirit by
prominent anti-prohibiuion newspapers
comes none too soon for the good of the
cause they advocate, and should teach the
bulldozers that they but solidify public
sentiment against themselves when they
prescribe men for opinions sake. The
intolerance at San Antonio began in boy
cotting, then manifested itself in re-
fusal to allow the people public plaza
in which to meet, and then found